*

"The opposite of joy is not sorrow. It is unbelief."
[L.Weatherhead, 'This is the Victory', 1941]

9. Hebrew and Greek Attitudes.

  But Scripture is no stranger to humor! The whole book of Jonah is nothing less than a comic masterpiece. The story of Balaam and his amazing talking ass is also most amusing; and there are many other little bits and assorted pieces of comic relief in the Old Testament. Even in the New Testament the comic spirit is sometimes acknowledged; and this is even recognized by the bravest among biblical scholars. In 1Thessalonians, Paul advises us to "Be joyful always" (5:16); and Matthew stresses the flip side of this command-idea: "And when you fast, do not look dismal" (6:16). Both of these early Christian wisdom sayings can be easily understood within the context of the Scriptures as a whole, and within the strong Jewish cultural and psycho-social environment:
 
The ancient Hebrews had to know laughter as a friend. You had better be able to laugh at a God who goes by the name of 'I Am Who I Am'. Moses is reported to have remarked, 'What is this, a joke?' Yahweh answered, 'You can call me "I Am" for short. On second thought, don't call me; I'll call you'. -- (adapted quote from Liebenow p.1)


  By the time that Luke composed, compiled, and edited his nameless history- in-two-parts (after the manner of Josephus; c.115CE), the Parting-of-the-Ways between Judaism and Christianity was already old news, and the new religion had well established itself in the  pluralistic and syncretistic cultural Climate of the Great Empire. Accordingly, the other three gospels must be viewed primarily through Jewish lenses, while Luke- Acts must be seen through Greco-Roman lenses. Once we do this, however, we wind up with a rather different attitude toward the lighter side: "Woe to you who laugh now, for you will mourn and weep" (Lk 6:25b). Apparently, there will be quite enough joy and mirth in heaven, so it's best to just wait for that. Moreover, the age of martyrs and persecutions is hardly the sort of thing to encourage an appreciation for comedy and humor. Thus the Greek Church much preferred Luke's theology-of-humor (or rather, non- humor), and developed it through Augustine and many others, such that it became the normal and accepted view of all such lighter-things.

  In his remarkable novel 'The Name of the Rose', author Umberto Eco tells a story of murder and mystery set in a 13C Benedictine monastery. At the end, the villain of the piece (an old and blind monk) sets the library aflame rather than let a certain book escape his grasp! And what kind of book could motivate a man of God to kill and terrify and destroy; you ask? Why only a small treatise by a philosopher: Aristotle's meditations on humor and comedy! This, then, explains (but not excuses) the poverty of theology as regards its treatment of biblical man and the lighter-side of reality. In truth, an ocean of light and life co-exists with the ocean of darkness and death (George Fox); but theologians seem unaware that this is the fundamental nature of both humanity and the Cosmos. The ancient Greek artists and playwrights, by way of contrast, were well aware that human life was a constant movement between the two contrasting poles of comedy and tragedy (with tragedy usually winning in the end).

"A clown accepts chaos as the normal living situation" - (Liebenow p.ix)
.
10. The Literature of Holy Humor.

  As we move closer to the present, we observe a general improvement in the theological climate overall, and this development has reached even into the theology-of-humor. Even the Catholic Church has participated in addressing the lighter side. In his fascinating collection of essays by Catholic scholars determined to explore the furthest reaches of religious experience, G.Devine goes so far as to include an essay by Robert E. Neale called 'Surprise - The Horrible, the Humorous, and the Holy'. Also, Harvey Cox devotes the last chapter in 'The Feast of Fools' to an interesting discussion of 'faith as play', and 'Christianity as comedy'. Now Cox is far more optimistic than us, and even speaks of the tide beginning to turn. But we do agree that there can be found "an increasing amount of work on Christianity and the comic sensibility. The comic, of course, has to do with more than the funny. It is a perspective on life" (Cox 149).

  All of this is perfectly true, and perfectly acceptable to theologians concerned to bring culture and religion together again; but the big problem still remains: What will theology do with the wisdom of foolishness? In fact, few theologians have the courage to dare venture into these uncharted waters; and the bulk of the work that has been done to date constitutes little more than a few tentative and preliminary charting surveys. Indeed, the best 'theologian' in the world today is not Kasper or Balthasar or any other of those foolish German types, but is a modest American named Robert L. Short. In 1965 he published 'The Gospel According to Peanuts', and a few years later 'The Parables of Peanuts' (1968), and more recently 'Short Meditations on the Bible and Peanuts' (1990). These three books should be tattooed onto the brain of every seminarian in the world today because there is no better antidote to the usual rubbish that passes for theology these days!

  Theology aside; Western literature has much to boast of as far as merging religion, humor, philosophy, wisdom, and popular writing. First there was A.A.Milne with 'Winne-the-Pooh' (1926) and 'The House at Pooh Corner' (1928). Then (ie. much latter) came two books by Robert M. Pirsig: 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance' (1974), and 'Lila: An Inquiry Into Morals' (1991). Also of recent vintage is a pair of books by Benjamin Hoff: 'The Tao of Pooh' (1982), and 'The Te of Piglet' (1992). All of these six books were inspired by Buddhist/Taoist ideas and/or principles. And thanks to Buddhism's more relaxed and open (and we might say: 'more realistic') attitude toward sacred texts, all six books will qualify as prime examples of 20C English sacred scripture ...

  Christianity can also boast of having modern sacred texts; mainly through the works of Russian writers such as Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, and Chekov. But the Russians are hardly even aware of the comic spirit, let alone inclined to write about it! In fact, there is a strong streak of the somber in both Vonnegut and Pirsig, which is not surprising since both Christianity and Buddhism recognize that the Four Noble Truths come first, last and always. The lighter side must somehow fit between the cracks of this ever-gloomy enveloping infinity of darkness and decay. It is largely the Chinese religious spirit (through Taoism) that saved Buddhism from Christianity's humorless fate, and elevated it from being a mere philosophical psychology to being the second greatest religion in all human history. [Of course, there is nothing to prevent Christianity from absorbing the wisdom of Taoism as well ...] The closest thing that Christianity has to a comic sage is Vonnegut. And he is a very stubborn agnostic! Alas & Alack! But it surely doth seem that Christianity is simply incapable of bringing together, between two covers, a pleasing blend of the Christian spirit and the comic spirit.

  If biblical and theological language is unfit to serve as a vehicle for the evangelization of the modern world (as Rice suggests), are we left with only Peanuts and B.C.? Not at all. In fact, an enlightened psychology provides a technical and flexible language that can well transmit gospel truths. Rest assured that there is a very good reason why the most favorite book (beside the Bible) of American deacons is Dr Peck's 'The Road Less Traveled'. Now his psychology is not flawless by any means; BUT he does leave an important role for joy (which is, of course, the cosmic category that encompasses all comedy, humor, laughter, ecstasy, and other yummy things). In other words, his language is both precise and powerful, and could easily be adapted to adequately deal with the many facets of joy and humor. It seems, then, that the best theologians in the world today are anything but professional theologians. Surely there is an important lesson here to be learned by the modern 'science' of theology!
 

11. A Theology of Laughter?.

  In light of the scant attention the comic spirit receives from theology, especially systematic and dogmatic theology, the first step in creating a viable theology of humor would appear to be the recognition of this general neglect, and the reasons for it. In 'The Lord of Confusion' (1970), Orsy clearly recognizes that Christians "seem to suffer from a chronic lack of a sense of humor" (48). we would only add that while this is certainly true of theologians and most other professional Christian writers, it is by no means true of all non- writing Christians. Indeed the average Christian is far more open to the divine humor than the academics. Perhaps that is why the Roman Catholic Church is foremost among those few who take humor seriously. Fr Cote (omi) has even proposed the development of a theology of laughter. Such an enterprise will, of course, affirm that "humor is an integral dimension of Christian faith, and to have lost a sense of humor - whether in Christian living, spirituality, or theology - is to have lost a vital element of our faith" (Cote 11).

  Now humor is not only vital to faith, but also vital to communication. This latter is important because "living means being spoken to" (Buber 112). And the fullness of biblical anthropo- morphism demonstrates that God speaks to us in many ways and means. All of this makes a theology of laughter possible (Cote 43). Neither is such a theology devoid of roots in the Christian tradition. Back in the 14C, Meister Eckhart suggested that "God laughs out of an abundance of divine life, energy, and love. He tells us we should never put our trust in a spirituality that is devoid of laughter, because good humor and laughter characterize the innermost relations between the persons of the Trinity" (Cote 54). On the other hand, any theology of humor will affirm not only the divine humor, but also human ignorance and blindness; and this will not sit well with most theologians (who are, of necessity it seems, experts in blindness).

GOTO CHAPTER TWELVE

textman
*